kansas appellate practice handbook - Kansas Judicial Branch

Judicial Review of Agency Decisions 6-13
If a court finds additional fact-finding and other proceedings are
needed before the court can make a final disposition of the matter on
review, the court may remand the matter to the agency to take action
needed and to make those findings. A matter may be remanded to an
agency if:
▪
▪
▪
▪
The agency failed to prepare or preserve a record adequate
for judicial review;
The court finds new evidence has become available relating
to the validity of agency action at the time it was taken, that
the parties did not know and had no duty to or could not
have reasonably discovered until after the agency action,
and the interests of justice would be served by remand to
the agency;
The agency improperly excluded or omitted evidence from
the record; or
A relevant provision of the law changed after the agency
action and the court has determined that the new provision
may control the outcome of the proceeding. K.S.A. 77-
619(b).
Under the KJRA, as at common law, the burden of proving the
invalidity of an administrative agency action is on the challenging party.
The validity of the agency action shall be determined by applying the
standards of judicial review to the action at the time it was taken. K.S.A.
77-621(a). See also Peck v. University Residence Committee of Kansas State
Univ., 248 Kan. 450, 455-56, 807 P.2d 652 (1991); Angle v. Kansas Dept. of
Revenue, 12 Kan. App. 2d 756, 761, 758 P.2d 226, rev. denied 243 Kan. 777
(1988).
The KJRA requires that the court conducting the review make a
separate and distinct ruling on each material issue on which it bases its
decision. K.S.A. 77-621(b). In K.S.A. 77-621(c), the Act requires relief to
be granted when the court determines:
▪
▪
The agency action was based on a facially unconstitutional
action, statute, or rule and regulation;
The agency acted outside its jurisdiction as provided by
law;
2013